Sustainable Urban Development and the Challenge of Policy Integration: An Assessment of Planning Tools for Integrating Spatial and Environmental Planning in the Netherlands

Over the last 10–15 years, urban planners in the Netherlands have been given more policy space for defining area-specific environmental ambitions, in an attempt to promote further the integration of environmental and urban planning. This increased policy space has offered new opportunities, but also poses new challenges for urban planners. Urban planners often appear to struggle with the issue of how to come to an operationalization of area-specific urban environmental quality. Various planning tools exist that can assist planners with these tasks. In this paper we distinguish between ‘substance-oriented’ tools such as environmental impact assessments and ‘process-oriented’ tools that facilitate interaction and consensus building among planners and stakeholders. Recently, in the Netherlands, a distinct type of ‘hybrid’ planning tool has been developed specifically for defining area-based environmental ambitions in spatial plans, coupled with the development of measures for attaining these ambitions. However, little research has been conducted into how these planning tools perform in practice and how this can be understood, especially in comparison with more traditional ‘substance-oriented’ and ‘process-oriented’ planning tools. In this paper we assess the added value of the new hybrid tools on the basis of an analysis of three exemplary case studies. Although the tools seem to be helpful in assisting urban planners to better integration of environmental and spatial planning, there are some aspects that deserve more attention, including the identification of financial consequences of environmental ambitions, and guidelines for dealing with controversies. Future research is recommended into the influence of the hybrid tools on their sociopolitical contexts, their performance in comparison with other hybrid planning tools, and their effective design.

[1]  Uta Hohn,et al.  New urban governance: Institutional change and consequences for urban development , 2006 .

[2]  Minna Kaljonen,et al.  Views on planning and expectations of SEA: the case of transport planning , 2004 .

[3]  R. Hoppe,et al.  Cultures of Public Policy Problems , 2002 .

[4]  Scott D. Campbell,et al.  Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities? Urban Planning and the Contradictions of Sustainable , 1996 .

[5]  Arild Underdal,et al.  Integrated marine policy: What? Why? How?☆ , 1980 .

[6]  Eivind Hovden,et al.  Environmental policy integration: towards an analytical framework , 2003 .

[7]  A. L. Brown,et al.  Increasing the utility of urban environmental quality information , 2003 .

[8]  P. Burrough,et al.  Coping with Uncertainties in Integrative Spatial Planning , 2005 .

[9]  Guido Antonius Vonk,et al.  Improving Planning Support : The use of planning support systems for spatial planning , 2006 .

[10]  Pieter Glasbergen,et al.  Co-operative Environmental Governance , 1998 .

[11]  R. Rhodes.  Understanding governance : policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability , 1997 .

[12]  O. V. D. Riet,et al.  Policy analysis in a multi-actor policy settings: navigating between negotiated nonsense & superfluous knowledge , 2003 .

[13]  D. Satterthwaite.  The Earthscan Reader in Sustainable Cities , 1999 .

[14]  Joachim H. Spangenberg,et al.  A guide to community sustainability indicators , 2000 .

[15]  P. Glasbergen.  Decentralized reflexive environmental regulation: Opportunities and risks based on an evaluation of Dutch experiments , 2005 .

[16]  F. Sommer,et al.  Making indicators count: Using quality of life indicators in local governance: Identifying the missing link , 2003 .

[17]  L. Susskind,et al.  The consensus building handbook : a comprehensive guide to reaching agreement , 1999 .

[18]  Martin De Jong,et al.  Cost-effective use of evaluation models: an empirical cross-national investigation , 2000, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[19]  T. Beatley,et al.  The Sustainable Urban Development Reader , 2004 .

[20]  Hens Runhaar,et al.  What makes strategic environmental assessment successful environmental assessment? The role of context in the contribution of SEA to decision-making , 2007 .

[21]  M. V. Eeten.  Recasting Intractable Policy Issues: The Wider Implications of The Netherlands Civil Aviation Controversy , 2001 .

[22]  Pier Vellinga,et al.  An integrated planning tool for sustainable cities , 2000 .

[23]  Paul Schot,et al.  Bottlenecks Blocking Widespread Usage of Planning Support Systems , 2005 .

[24]  N. Videira,et al.  Public and stakeholder participation in European water policy: a critical review of project evaluation processes , 2006 .